neil phillips

Haven't followed the entire discussion. But the softening effect on the image caused by unfocussed light, and or under and over correction of cheaper achromat lenses. Can not be over stated. I've seen first hand the varying degree of this problem on lunar images with different mass produced achromats. It varied quite a bit. Some worse than others. But all suffered to some degree. The sharpest achromat i had recently was a F12.8 70 mm skywatcher and it was indeed very sharp. For me personally if i ever did get another achro. It would certainly be the longest FL i could get. Preferably F15. These softening effects that manifest with cheap achro lenses. Show in lunar images as a rather milky misty type of appearance similar to what one might expect when a lens is dewed over. Compared to sharp Newtonian optics. It can be off putting. Having said all this the Bresser 127l i was using, was a fun scope to use. Yes it did have a slight softening to its images. But wasn't too obtrusive. It was still very enjoyable to use. With many of the benefits of a large quality refractor at a fraction of the price. For those who can not afford large premium refractors. You certainly do get to have a little taste of what its like to own a large refractor. As a fun scope they are really rather good i found. False color. When imaging in mono, on lunar and solar wasn't a problem. And it did well for the money i paid. But really ultimately for lunar and planetary guys a 6" F8 Newtonian of reasonable optical quality will be a somewhat sharper proposition. With the best color correction possible. Better than any achromat no matter its quality. As a side note my 8" Classical Cassegrain is such a sharp performer. It wouldn't surprise me if it matched or likely out performed a 5" premium refractor of many thousands of pounds. If anyone wants to test that theory send me a 5" premium refractor and i will pit it against my (7.3) CC lunar imaging showdown. Now of course i realize there's much more to a 5" premium refractor than just lunar imaging. I am only suggesting For certain purposes. Under certain conditions, Much cheaper telescopes can sometimes outperform much more expensive ones. But almost always will be mirror based of lager aperture, especially with good optics. As another example my 12" Newtonian can outperform my CC Even though i rate its optical quality less highly. You cant get away from the laws of physics unfortunately. All of this is of course seeing dependent too. I am probably going a bit off topic now. So back to the virtues of achromats and filtering to reduce CA and minimize damaging effects of out of focus light on imaging or viewing. I liked my Baarder 495 it did seem to sharpen up the image. And without too much of a transmission loss. But louis is the one whos doing the testing so will know much more than me about any of that

Very nice UV image there. Plenty of good fine detail

Not seen that before what a amazing scope. And with Hinds optics i bet the F10 will be some serious fun on Jupiter this year

Yeah. and it shows. Every reason to go that route when the data is good. you do get a finer more precise process with far less detail bloat. Take note everyone this is how its done. Note to self before the big guys show. Not long now. (ok my first efforts will probably be dyadic. ) But you get the point. When data is good, it needs fine sharpening. And you sir just re proved it to me. Its been a while since i was re taught any old lesson. We go back. And have done that through the years. Good to feel that dynamic influence again Bud. Kon is the king of the undriven dob. You are the driven.

Wow. I had about 6 or 7 at one point. I get the thing of beauty. Each different with there own character. Those C9.25s do have a reputation, Don't think I've ever seen a bad image from one. If there's one scope i would replace my 8" Stella lyra with. It would be that scope. Though i am happy with my baby CC its really a sharp lunar scope. Its forte no question. Hope to see more from your Celestron Roy. Its a lovely capture again

Yes you should compare, And likely do it more than once. Some conditions favor certain settings more than others. Really good seeing can tolerate longer exposures better for example. The opposite is true of average or poorer seeing. I just think there's often a sweet spot to be found with certain equipment, with certain seeing conditions. It has to be found by your own hand, at your location. with your own equipment. We can in theory just max out gain and set exposure accordingly each and every time we image. But that approach wouldn't take into account better seeing which enables slower exposures less noise less gain. less frames needed in a stack. I nearly always adjust exposure and frame rates during a planet session. I experiment I don't like sticking to procedures like glue. I like finding the ones that are working best at any given time Yes i will say most often the faster exposure, higher gain, higher frame count turns out to produce the most detail. Otherwise i wouldn't do it. But not always. Because of many variables. Its worth experimenting. Then you get to learn the effects of what your doing without relying on pre determined numbers, or others recommended settings. It will make you a better imager in the long run. Though in your case its a little different because you have no drive. Which should favor a higher frame count per se. Shouldn't it I don't like maxing out gain full stop. But will if i have to. Those recent Venus, i did just that. The higher scale with Barlow was working better on the 7.3 CC. As i found out twice. But your camera is better than mine. Chris go says don't be afraid of gain (if i am remembering correctly ) But pulling back a little can have its own virtues and benefits. As i said i think there's a cutoff point of diminishing returns. If that wasn't so, Think about it, we might as well just do 100% gain and set exposure accordingly. Every time we image. But that is limiting ourselves. Also sometimes a reduction in gain. Doesn't always equate to a reduction in frame rate. Or exposure. A case in point Not sure if i am making sense ?

Nice capture Roy. Showing good detail. Btw how many excellent scopes do you have. ?

Those are just lovely. Right up my street. Not overcooked, Natural subtle, but very fine wispy cloud. Hey wanna trade locations ill throw in a laser LASER CANNON

Yes i think it was Mars. Your correct. Geoff was capturing at a slower rate with a C14 my 245mm seemed to cope better on the same night. And i seemed to remember telling you and Geoff the faster frame rate was doing better that night. And after seeing the images you both tended to agree and took note. Each planet is different of course. Mars is small and bright. There's a cutoff point of speeds benefits. And its just a case of finding that cutoff point on each planet.

That camera chip although smaller. leaves my 178 in the dust judging by what you guys are finding

My 178 is on 30 to 60 FPS 90 to 100% gain.

looking tasty. Some wispy fine detail on show.

Can easily see the rill its a excellent capture and process

Appreciated Swoop

Yes the mosaic has a certain natural HD balance. I thought it came out reasonably well too. Cheers

Possibly the best capture from the 27 th. Brightness of the sky not ideal. But a fair amount of detail coming through. Tried oversampling just as a experiment. Orion 245mm Newtonian. Baarder Q 2.5 x Barlow. Player one IR 685. SW EQ6 PRO. ZWO 178MM Full capture size

Was a large sample rate. The full size is huge these had 20% reduction in size to help quality Cheers

Was a experiment over sampling. Overall i will pull back a bit next time i think. The mosaics were under sampled and drizzled. Which i thought came out reasonably well. Cheers

Didn't go out on the 26th. 27th was variable. But under high pressure overall it was quite reasonable i thought.

Close ups in daylight, mosaic getting darker Orion 245mm Newtonian. SW EQ6 PRO Mount. Pro planet IR 685 ZWO 178MM Baader Q 2.5 x Barlow closeups 80% Mosaic 50 % 75% and full.

Cheers guys

Sweet capture. Congrats on the new arrival, bet your itching to see what it can do. Lovely chip

Vey nice detail. You have been a tour de force this apparition. Excellent work.

Not the best result but was capturing between cloud, and often some rolling through the capture. So not too shabby considering 7.3 Classical Cassegrain was still light when capturing 11 sections 75%

Not the best result but was capturing between cloud, and often some rolling through the capture. So considering all that still not too shabby. 7.3 Classical Cassegrain 11 sections captured in bright sky 75%